Do Iranians deserve progressive and (for those who haven’t heard of Hillary Clinton’s distinction) liberal sympathy?

Not according to this post at Secular Right by Razib Khan – er, I mean David Hume. The opinions of Iranians on a variety of social issues is presented, and it doesn’t mesh well with progressive predilections stateside.

We know the bigger conservative outlets online have been calling, relatively explicitly, for solidarity with those involved in the Iranian uprising. But it’s the other side of the political spectrum that is of interest here. I mention it because I’ve seen alot of support on Facebook recently, from former classmates and various others, for Iranians in their struggle against an apparently increasingly corrupt, out of touch, uber-conservative regime. But I haven’t heard much about conservatism per se from the media, only “stolen elections” and such (though theocracy and its illegitimacy is no doubt a subtext). The reason would seem to be hinted at by the public opinion displayed at SR. The vastmajority of Iranian respondents, across the income spectrum (wherein higher income is associated with higher education), thought that abortion was never justifiable; that homosexuality was never justifiable; and that “men should have more right to job than women.” These social attitudes need not be informed by a religious orientation, and in fact elsewhere Razib has noted that social conservatism is not inherently linked to either personal religiosity or an officially sanctioned state religion. Though I do think it might partially explain why a move to overthrow theocracy itself is not afoot.

If there were a question dealing with race, I’d love to see how it turned out. It is the issue for the modal liberal in modern America, aside from possibly environmentalism, but that’s because the issue of race has become less salient in recent years – the years since 1992, say. And as political philosopher and progressive academic heroine Amy Gutmann tells us, there is no democracy without a rectification of the race problem, a conflation of democracy with liberal democracy (ala Fareed Zakaria), and a proper stance – a “substantive” stance – on racial matters.

So perhaps a stand-in will do for the missing “race” variable. How about immigration? According to the same World Values Survey Razib utilizes, Iranians are less cosmopolitan than Americans on this issue too. A greater proportion of Iranians disagree with the notion “Let Anyone Come In” than do Americans, and by a much wider margin agree with the statement “Stop People From Coming.”

In sum, what is it that Facebook fans of the Iranian uprising think will happen over there if their pleas are successful? If it’s a purely procedural form of democracy they hope to usher in, then I note their lack of interest in this problem wherever it exists. It seems to me that a perception that liberal, youthful, lovers of substantive freedom and a progressive ethos are up against a stodgy reactionary establishment is what motivates this enthusiasm. But if in fact the people they are supporting are even less liberal in orientation than a right-wing Republican (ooh, double shot!), and it appears that this is the case, what’s to get so excited about?

Yes, but the conservative mullahs are EVEN MORE conservative than the protesters; remember, they won’t let women go out in public without hijab. I’m sure most lefties have no problem rooting for the (laissez-faire) French ‘left’ against the ancien regime when reading about the French Revolution.

Israel vs Palestine: I’ve always found it amusing that the paleocons’ anti-Semitism causes them to take the non-Western side in that conflict; by any measure, the Israelis are much more Western than the Pals. It just goes to show how old conflicts (Nazis vs Jews) can be more important than new ones. It’s sort of the same way American Jews keep reacting to the Holocaust and attacking conservative Christians instead of forming a pro-Israel alliance with them over the partisan divide.

The thing about the mullahs being more conservative is what I was trying to get at calling it a Snowdrift game, which was probably a bad reference to make as I was confused when John Hawks used it only about a month ago.

It is for that reason of civilizational kinship (which oddly enough Huntington did not see in the case of Israel) that I sympathize more with the Israelis and wouldn’t mind if the Palestinians all had to move to other Arab countries. Being a consistent isolationist though I oppose any U.S involvement or foreign aid.

I don’t blame you; we need oil, and the Arabs have got it. I’m all for trying to find alternative energy sources; it’s not good to be dependent on foreign countries for resources where avoidable. Until then we have to kiss their asses, and Israel is in the way.

I had heard of this…I may have even read Wilson’s article and been indirectly inspired by it (I honestly don’t remember). Coming full circle?

I don’t doubt the young, urban protesters, especially (to a lesser degree the ruling conservative opposition, or reformists), are more liberal, but look at the standard you’ve set. Less conservative than those who won’t let women go out without a hijab is still even more conservative than a right-wing Republican in the US. That’s what I was getting at.

Seems hard to believe a progressive in the US would find that an exciting group to get behind. My hunch is that they think the protesters and their leaders are, generally speaking, alot like progressive democrats stateside. Looks like a big ‘no’ on that score.

On Israel vs. Palestine, I’m not certain that many of the paleo-cons are sympathizing with Palestinians due to anti-semitism, though I’d certainly agree that they are more likely to for that reason than are other branches of American conservatism.

If the Palestinians had consistently made this an issue about land theft since day one, I’d have alot more sympathy for them, and as is stands I’m sort of middle of the road. I used to want to try and figure that shit out, but now I’m more inclined to just echo TGGP on non-intervention.

Hmmm…maybe it’s just my paranoia, but why else would paleocons sympathize with Palestinians? Liberal sympathy is easy to understand…they always go for the underdog. But sympathizing with people who follow a religion that is the historic rival of Christianity? Judaism was never much of a threat, but Islam took Constantinople and was only stopped at the gates of Vienna.

Besides, I always had the sense that conservatives tended to respect accomplishment rather than sympathize with the oppressed. Sort of like Yankees versus Mets fans, though that may be a bit too NY-centric an analogy to make sense. :) (The Yankees have lots of money and win all the time; the Mets, despite having almost as much money, don’t do as well. So if you root for the overdog, you’re a Yankee fan; if you root for the underdog, you’re a Mets fan. Of course these things have different associations in, say, Boston.)

Some paleos sympathise with, in the words of the leftist William Appleman Williams, “those who lost”. The antifederalists, Wilhelmine Germany (or even the Czars/Bourbons vs the revolutionaries), the Confederates and so on. There’s also a sort of general contrarianism. Many paleos sympathized with the Serbs when we attacked them (Buchanan previously favored the Croatians over them because they were Catholic, but changed his position later). Many paleos now defend Putin’s Russia against its critics and pooh-pooh a lot of the talk about Iran.

Interesting bit about accomplishments. Sailer & Cochran contrasted Eisenhower & McCain on that metric here. Robin Hanson discussed the admiration conservatives, libertarians & liberals feel for leadership, victimhood or being “self-made” men here. Jeet Heer claims the Right switched from supporting Arabs/Palestinians to Israel because Israel became top-dog. Walt & Mearsheimer’s book supports the idea that the U.S became more pro-Israel after Israel’s great victory in 1967.

[…] the non-Western world does democracy would surely be a bitchslap to their conceited conceptions; as TGGP said about the 2009 Iranian elections… The vast majority of Iranian respondents, across the income spectrum (wherein higher income is […]